I have a UseCase in a Usecase Diagram for which there is a reference to another composite structure diagram as shown in the figure
.
Now, I want to fetch the diagram that is added to this Usecase using Enterprise Architect's Java API or from the Database. I could not find any reference to the diagram from the element int_object table or any reference to usecase from the referred diagram in t_diagram table. Is there a way to achieve this?
With the API you can use EA.Element.CompositeDiagram
In the database the diagramID is stored in the field t_object.Pdata1, or sometimes hidden in the t_xref table.
To elaborate on Geert's answer: PDATA1 is used for Activity and InteractionOccurrence elements only. Any other element uses t_xref in such way that an entry with Name == DefaultDiagram is created. Client contains the element's GUID and Supplier that of the composite diagram. Moreover t_object.NType == 8 indicates that a composite diagram is used.
Personally I wouldn't have used the CompositeDiagram as I'm so much used to bypass the API (which is not always the best to do).
EA's database design can probably be best described as database scribble.
Related
We would like to create an OData REST API. Our data model is such that each customer has their own database. All database objects have the same definition across all customer databases, with the exception of a single table.
The customer specific table we will call Contact. When a customer adds a column the system creates a column with a standardised name with a definition translated from options selected by the user in the UI. The user only refers to the column data by a field name they have specified to enable the user to be able to generate friendly queries.
It seems to me that the following approaches could be used to enable OData for the model described:
1) Create an OData open type to cater for the dynamic properties. This has the disadvantage of user requests for a customer not providing an indication of the dynamic properties that can be queried against. Even though they will be known for the user (via token authentication). Also, because dynamic properties are a dictionary, some data pivoting and inefficient query writing would be required. Not sure how to implement the IQueryable handling of query options for the dynamic properties to enable our own custom field querying.
2) Create a POCO class with e.g. 50 properties; CustomField1, CustomField2... Then somehow control which fields are exposed for use in OData calls. We would then include a separate API call to expose the custom field mapping. E.g. custom field friendly name of MobileNumber = CustomField12.
3) At runtime, check to see if column definitions of table changed since last check. If have, generate class specific to customer using CodeDom and register it with OData. Aiming for a unique URL for each customer. E.g. http://domain.name/{customer guid}/odata
I think the ideal for us is option 2. However, the fact the CustomField1 could be an underlying SQL data type of nvarchar, int, decimal, datetime, etc, there are added complications.
Has anyone a working example of how to achieve what has been described, satisfactorily?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Rik
We have run into a similar situation but with our entire dataset being unknown until runtime. Using the ODataConventionModelBuilder and EdmModel classes, you can add properties dynamically to the model at runtime.
I'm not sure whether you will have to manually add all of the properties for this object type even though only some of them are unknown or whether you can add your main object and then add your dynamic ones afterwards, but I guess either would be workable.
If you can get hold of which type of user it is on the server, you could then add only the properties that you are interested in (like option 3 but not having to CodeDom).
There is an example of this kind of untyped OData server in the OData samples here that should get you started: https://github.com/OData/ODataSamples/tree/master/WebApi/v4/ODataUntypedSample
The research we carried out actually posed Option 1 as the most suitable approach for some operations. i.e. Create an SQL view that unpivots the data in a table to a key/value pair of column name/column value for each column in the table. This was suitable for queries returning small datasets. This was far less effort than Option 3 and less confusing for the user than Option 2. The unpivot query converted the field values to nvarchar (string) values and thus meant that filtering in the UI by column value data types was not simple to achieve. (If we decide to implement this ability, I believe this can be achieved by creating a custom attribute that derives from EnablQueryAttribute, marking the controller action with it and manipulate the IQueryable before execution).
However, we wanted to expose a /Contacts/Export endpoint that when called would output the columns from a table with a fixed schema joined on a table with a client specific schema and output to a CSV file. All the while utilising the OData supported filter syntax. One of our customer databases has more than 12 million rows of data and is made up of approximately 30 columns.
To achieve this it looks like our best bet would have been to work with the Microsoft.OData.Core.UriParser.UriQueryExpressionParser class, unfortunately Microsoft in their wisdom have declared this as internal, as well as many of it's dependants.
Walking an abstract syntax tree built from OData supported query options and applying our own visitor to each node to build some dynamic Linq query/SQL seems like a possible solution.
For the time-being we will simply implement a cut-down set of supported $filter criteria without the support for grouping parenthesis.
So I'm creating a database model using Entity Framework's Code First paradigm and I'm trying to create two tables (Players and Teams) that must share a uniqueness constraint regarding their primary key.
For example, I have 3 Players with Ids "1", "2" and "3" and when I try to create a Team with Id "2", the system should validate uniqueness and fail because there already exists a Player with Id "2".
Is this possible with data annotations? Both these entities share a common Interface called IParticipant if that helps!
Txs in advance lads!
The scenario you are describing here isn't really ideal. This isn't really a restriction on Entity Framework; it's more a restriction on the database stack. By default, the Id primary key is an Identity column, and SQL itself isn't really supportive of the idea of "shared" Identity columns. You can disable Identity and manage the Id properties yourself, but then Entity Framework cannot automatically build navigation properties for your entities.
The best option here is to use one single participant table, in a technique called "Table Per Hierarchy", or TPH. Entity Framework can manage the single table using an internal discriminator column. Shared properties can be put into the base class, and non-shared properties can be put on the individual classes, which Entity Framework will composite into a single large table in the DB. The main drawback to this strategy is that columns for non-shared properties will automatically be nullable in the database. This article describes this scenario very well.
The more I try to come up with a solution, I realize that this is an example of the XY Problem. There is not really a good solution to this question, because this question is already a proposed solution. There is a problem here that has led you to create an Interface which you suggest requires the entities which are using the interface to have a unique Id. This really sounds like an issue with the design of the Interface itself, as Interfaces should be agnostic to the entity they are applied to. Perhaps providing some code and showing what your problem actually is would be helpful, since the proposed solution you are asking how to implement here isn't really practical.
I am trying to understand when someone would use AddItemToSet vs StoreRelatedEntities.
It seems the former is a way to associate a set label with a string-based item handle.
The latter is a way to associate two entities, which seems like a more generalized operation.
What is it that AddItemToSet does that StoreRelatedEntities can't do?
Thanks
The AddItemToSet API in ServiceStack.Redis is a 1:1 mapping that calls Redis' Server SADD Operation, i.e. adds an item to a Redis SET.
The StoreRelatedEntities is a higher-level operation that also maintains an index containing relationship between the entities described in detail in this Storing Related Entities in Redis answer.
I am developing a SPA using Angular-Breeze-WebAPI-EntityFramework.
Now Breeze uses the Entity Framework metadata information to create it's own Breeze models. We use this in our application for Breeze validation.
So far, it's all been nice and easy. Now we are having to create a search page (say for querying customers). The search can be by Customer.Name or by Product.Id (which would return a list of customers who have bought that product). The result is a ng-repeater, which displays Customer.Name, Order.LastPlaced etc.
if you are getting confused by the tables and columns, forget that. What I am only trying to get to is that, both the search object and the result object are not 1:1 with Entity tables (or objects). So obviously I feel the need to create a custom object (one for the search and one for the results). My question primarily is where and how do I create that object?
If I create it at the data layer, Breeze would have no idea of the metadata for each of the properties (since it uses EF for that).
I obviously can't create just a JavaScript object, since I will have to query the database (using EF) to search and populate the object.
So where does one create such a custom object (traversing multiple tables) such that Breeze still can figure out the metadata and perform validation and such when the need arises?
Thank you all.
You can create metadata on the client for types that the server either doesn't know about or doesn't have the schema for. See http://www.breezejs.com/documentation/metadata-by-hand.
In a project I work on there is a C# library containing business objects which are related to the backing database tables/stored procedures.
We imported the code into EA model (where we already have database model) and now I'd like to show dependency between a class and a table (or stored procedure output).
Since these are loosely coupled (i.e. only a portion of properties are shared between them) I'd like to have a relation between a class A and table B and in the properties of this relation to have the mapping (A.a <-> B.a , ...).
Is this possible and how?
You can draw connectors between two elements and then link one or both ends to an element feature (an attribute or an operation). Draw the connector, then right-click near the end and select Link to Element Feature.
You can draw any number of connectors between two elements, and link any number of them to any features at either or both ends.
You should note that this is an EA feature which is not in the UML standard. As such, it is also a little trickier to automate (the feature link is not documented in the API), but I've done it before for a client so it can be done. However, from your question I assume it's the manual case you're interested in.